Chapter on Testimony

Shaykh al-Islām—may Allah be pleased with him—was asked about narration:

“Is everyone whose narration is accepted also accepted as a witness?”

He replied:

As for the question, “Is everyone whose narration is accepted also accepted as a witness?” this is disputed. Scholars agree that a slave’s narration is accepted, but they disagree over the admissibility of his testimony. According to Alī, Anas, and Shurayh, his testimony is admissible; this is also the position of Ahmad and others. According to Abū Hanīfah, Mālik, and al-Shāfi‘ī, his testimony is not admissible.

A woman’s narration is accepted without restriction, whereas her testimony is accepted in principle. This is because testimony concerns a particular individual, and its ruling does not extend to the witness. By contrast, the ruling conveyed through narration has wider application: the narrator relates a ruling that applies equally to himself and to others. For this reason, narration does not require multiple transmitters, whereas testimony requires multiple witnesses. This is one of the distinctions scholars have drawn between the two.